Urges Supreme Court to Protect Medical Freedom and Informed Consent

Washington, DC - April 9, 2026

On April 6, 2026, Dr. Simone Gold and the AFLDS legal team filed an amici curiae brief with the United States Supreme Court in Sweeney v. University of Colorado Hospital Authority (25-1055) supporting the Petitioners’ request for writ of certiorari and reversal of the Tenth Circuit’s decision.

Last year, AFLDS filed an amici curiae brief in support of the Petitioners in the Tenth Circuit.

The Petitioners are former healthcare employees of the University of Colorado Hospital Authority who were terminated after refusing COVID-19 injections that were mandated as a condition of employment. The Respondents include the hospital authority and associated state officials responsible for enforcing the mandate.

AFLDS is asking the Supreme Court to grant certiorari and determine whether government actors and affiliated institutions can condition employment on the acceptance of an investigational medical product. If left unreviewed, the Tenth Circuit’s ruling permits coercive medical mandates to stand without meaningful judicial scrutiny, even where fundamental constitutional rights are implicated.

The Petitioners challenged the mandate, alleging violations of their constitutional rights, including bodily autonomy, equal protection, and due process. The district court dismissed the case, and the Tenth Circuit affirmed.

AFLDS maintains that this case presents a clear constitutional violation. Coercively mandating dangerous and potentially fatal experimental drugs, in direct violation of informed consent, cannot be condoned. These vaccine mandate cases are flooding the lower courts, presenting urgent questions of public policy that demand this Court’s immediate attention. Lives are at stake.

Further, we contend that conditioning employment on the acceptance of an investigational medical product violates the fundamental right to refuse medical treatment and exceeds the lawful authority of government actors. Federal law requires that individuals be informed of their right to accept or refuse products authorized under emergency use, a right that is nullified when refusal results in termination.

“This case presents a clear example of dangerous and unconstitutional coercion,” said AFLDS attorney David Dalia. “The government has no authority to force individuals to accept an unwanted medical intervention that does not protect any other people as a condition of keeping their job. That is a direct violation of informed consent and of fundamental constitutional protections. When refusal leads to termination, consent is a fiction. Informed consent to medical treatment can never be coerced. The Court should not allow this kind of overreach to stand.”

Dr. Simone Gold, Founder and President of America’s Frontline Doctors, added, “These healthcare workers did what every human has the right to do, they said no. For that, they were stripped of their careers.  Informed consent cannot exist under threat of losing your livelihood. When the government can dictate medical decisions under threat of losing your livelihood, we have crossed a dangerous line, and it will not end with COVID.”

This case presents an opportunity for the Supreme Court to reaffirm constitutional limits on government authority and restore the principle that medical decisions must remain voluntary.

Stay tuned for further updates on this case and our ongoing efforts to defend medical freedom and constitutional rights nationwide.

# # #

About AFLDS

We are the Nation's independent authority on ethical and transparent standards in science, health, and human rights. We provide individuals with unbiased and accurate information from the world's top experts in medicine and law so you can be empowered with facts to protect your rights, take care of your health, and safeguard your future. Visit AFLDS.org

Media Contact Lisa Alexander, Executive Director | Media@AFLDS.org